Reacting to a news report about MoD officials raising objections to the Rafale deal, former IAF deputy chief S.B.P. Sinha says he’s heard about this only now.
Union minister Piyush Goyal and V-P Venkaiah Naidu’s secretariat used images of Lockheed Martin’s F-16, an aircraft the Indian Air Force has never possessed.
Rafale controversy reveals pitfalls of both excessively centralised decision-making and of emphasis on public positioning rather than strategic outcomes.
Like China, India remains a big domestic market, which will continue to attract investment, but the US tariffs will make India unattractive for future investments.
New bill aims to fix key issues with IBC 2016, including delays & patchy implementation, and protect creditors, with window for genuine promoters to retain control of their companies.
India’s 1st tri-service seminar, on the lines of Shangri-La Dialogue, kicks off in Mhow, with top military officers & defence attaches from several countries in attendance.
Putin sees this as a victory. Europeans have decided to deal with Trump on his terms for the sake of the larger Western alliance. We look at the lessons for us in India.
I would blame BJP entirely for not having clarity in dealing with Rafale controversy. If it knows that the deal is clean, then there was nothing to hide and all the processes and steps involved in the decision should have been properly explained rather than piecemeal explanation from time to time and that too, after wild accusations by Rahul. It is clear from beginning that deal is clean, as required by IAF and in the interest of the country. Only point not understood by anyone is when negotiations with HAL were on, why and when Modi decided to go for this deal and announced the intent in Paris. There are various complicated issues involved in decision making for this deal but the general public may get carried away by words like corruption, Ambani and link it to farmer distress etc. Hope general public understands the nuances and BJP does not pay for its poor communication on this issue. Even now, instead of shouting in Lok Sabha, BJP should have one English and one Hindi press conference and explain all the details cooly and confidently.
The “emergency”, to quickly obtain 36 aircraft has never been explained. If there was an emergency, if Dassault was to provide 36 planes on urgent basis, jumping the queue, then those aircrafts should have started landing by now. That could have also explained paying an extra price. It’s all so intriguing because everyone is trying to detect some logic in the whole thing. We must try to understand a very simple thing: decisions based on ego follow no rationale! In fact, wider off the mark they are from any logic, greater is the satisfaction they impart to the egoist. Ekdam sensational kaam kar diya! “Maine toh unko keh diya hai, buss. Ab aap loag papers taiyyar karwa lijiye please”. This must have been the brief to Raksha Mantralaya. God alone knows what’s going on!
This is regarding the first two sentences. To begin, IAF wanted the airplanes 2001 onwards. The MoD delayed and delayed till 2007 when RFP was floated. By the time 126 airplane contest was decided, it was 2012! In the meanwhile IAF fighter strength went down and is still continuing to diminish. Its projected that by 2025 we will have something like only 20-25 squadrons! (Exact numbers and time frame are conjectural). That was/ is the emergency. In the meanwhile negotiations were going S-L-o-w-l-y. The escalation in prices in Euros and the depreciation of the Rupee was going apace. By the time a new Govt took over in 2014, it was abundantly clear that we could never buy the full 126 in one contract. To top it all Dassault would not guaranty HAL-built aeroplanes as fit to perform their combat role. And even Boeing, that makes 3 airliners-a-day does not make 3 F-18’s in a day. So 36 airplanes will require time to build, test and fly to India. And IAF will require to train at least 18-20 pilots to ferry those airplanes. We are NOT buying 36 Maruti cars for Lord’s sake!
Inter- ministerial wranglings and difference of opinion are part of any government functioning. This proves nothing. In the previous article of N.Ram, he made invalid conclusions based on wrong arithmetic and logic.,The Rafale debate is moving in round circles and leading nowhere. The 16 th Lok Sabha is nearing its end and formation of JPC is simply not feasible now. Even if Modi loses election, this doesn’t prove or disprove any guilt. In a recent news published in the ET, Dassault has declared that production of components of Falcon jets, which are meant for civil aviation, has commenced in Dassault-Reliance Defence JV plant in Nagpur. The outcry of Anil Ambani manufacturing 36 Rafale planes in Nagpur is a hoax. As reported by Dassault, all the 36 planes will be manufactured in France. Rafale has become only a part of election campaigning, nothing more.
This is a hybrid transaction. A Government to Government deal would apply if the IAF was buying from the FAF some aircraft being flown by them. The price could be negotiated, starting from the price paid by the FAF to Dassault, minus depreciation, plus subsequent price increase due to inflation. One presumes this is how things work when MoD buys surplus material from Pentagon stockpiles. Since the Indian government is – effectively – making a payment to the US government, there would be no risk of the money going bad, or non fulfilment of agreed conditions. Hence no need for a bank / sovereign guarantee. Since no one buys second hand 4.5 generation aircraft, the other contingency would be for the FAF to divert part of an existing supply schedule of new aircraft to the IAF, on the same prices / terms as apply to its own purchase. 2. The deal started out as a conventional procurement through global tender. Rafale was selected by a transparent process, by the previous government. Ideally, the on going negotiations ought to have been completed by the successor government. If there was extreme urgency, 36 aircraft were needed to be bought off the shelf, perhaps the negotiations could have been reoriented. In what situation the change in procurement would negate the sanctity of the original tender, giving other bidders a legal grievance, is a matter for experts to discuss. 3. However, how a conventional, by global tender, procurement underwent the chrysalis of a G to G deal is difficult to understand. The buyer and the seller are the same. The specifications and India specific enhancements are laid down by the IAF. Unclear what role the French government plays in such a situation. With India and Dassault having dealt with each other for over forty years, it is not even required as a confirming party. One presumes payments are being made directly to Dassault, not routed through the French Treasury. If the supplier goes bust, unclear if the French Government will reimburse India. Hence their reluctance to furnish a sovereign or bank guarantee, restricting it to a Letter of Comfort. Hopefully, the 36 birds will touch down safely in India, this will not become an issue.
I would blame BJP entirely for not having clarity in dealing with Rafale controversy. If it knows that the deal is clean, then there was nothing to hide and all the processes and steps involved in the decision should have been properly explained rather than piecemeal explanation from time to time and that too, after wild accusations by Rahul. It is clear from beginning that deal is clean, as required by IAF and in the interest of the country. Only point not understood by anyone is when negotiations with HAL were on, why and when Modi decided to go for this deal and announced the intent in Paris. There are various complicated issues involved in decision making for this deal but the general public may get carried away by words like corruption, Ambani and link it to farmer distress etc. Hope general public understands the nuances and BJP does not pay for its poor communication on this issue. Even now, instead of shouting in Lok Sabha, BJP should have one English and one Hindi press conference and explain all the details cooly and confidently.
The “emergency”, to quickly obtain 36 aircraft has never been explained. If there was an emergency, if Dassault was to provide 36 planes on urgent basis, jumping the queue, then those aircrafts should have started landing by now. That could have also explained paying an extra price. It’s all so intriguing because everyone is trying to detect some logic in the whole thing. We must try to understand a very simple thing: decisions based on ego follow no rationale! In fact, wider off the mark they are from any logic, greater is the satisfaction they impart to the egoist. Ekdam sensational kaam kar diya! “Maine toh unko keh diya hai, buss. Ab aap loag papers taiyyar karwa lijiye please”. This must have been the brief to Raksha Mantralaya. God alone knows what’s going on!
This is regarding the first two sentences. To begin, IAF wanted the airplanes 2001 onwards. The MoD delayed and delayed till 2007 when RFP was floated. By the time 126 airplane contest was decided, it was 2012! In the meanwhile IAF fighter strength went down and is still continuing to diminish. Its projected that by 2025 we will have something like only 20-25 squadrons! (Exact numbers and time frame are conjectural). That was/ is the emergency. In the meanwhile negotiations were going S-L-o-w-l-y. The escalation in prices in Euros and the depreciation of the Rupee was going apace. By the time a new Govt took over in 2014, it was abundantly clear that we could never buy the full 126 in one contract. To top it all Dassault would not guaranty HAL-built aeroplanes as fit to perform their combat role. And even Boeing, that makes 3 airliners-a-day does not make 3 F-18’s in a day. So 36 airplanes will require time to build, test and fly to India. And IAF will require to train at least 18-20 pilots to ferry those airplanes. We are NOT buying 36 Maruti cars for Lord’s sake!
Inter- ministerial wranglings and difference of opinion are part of any government functioning. This proves nothing. In the previous article of N.Ram, he made invalid conclusions based on wrong arithmetic and logic.,The Rafale debate is moving in round circles and leading nowhere. The 16 th Lok Sabha is nearing its end and formation of JPC is simply not feasible now. Even if Modi loses election, this doesn’t prove or disprove any guilt. In a recent news published in the ET, Dassault has declared that production of components of Falcon jets, which are meant for civil aviation, has commenced in Dassault-Reliance Defence JV plant in Nagpur. The outcry of Anil Ambani manufacturing 36 Rafale planes in Nagpur is a hoax. As reported by Dassault, all the 36 planes will be manufactured in France. Rafale has become only a part of election campaigning, nothing more.
This is a hybrid transaction. A Government to Government deal would apply if the IAF was buying from the FAF some aircraft being flown by them. The price could be negotiated, starting from the price paid by the FAF to Dassault, minus depreciation, plus subsequent price increase due to inflation. One presumes this is how things work when MoD buys surplus material from Pentagon stockpiles. Since the Indian government is – effectively – making a payment to the US government, there would be no risk of the money going bad, or non fulfilment of agreed conditions. Hence no need for a bank / sovereign guarantee. Since no one buys second hand 4.5 generation aircraft, the other contingency would be for the FAF to divert part of an existing supply schedule of new aircraft to the IAF, on the same prices / terms as apply to its own purchase. 2. The deal started out as a conventional procurement through global tender. Rafale was selected by a transparent process, by the previous government. Ideally, the on going negotiations ought to have been completed by the successor government. If there was extreme urgency, 36 aircraft were needed to be bought off the shelf, perhaps the negotiations could have been reoriented. In what situation the change in procurement would negate the sanctity of the original tender, giving other bidders a legal grievance, is a matter for experts to discuss. 3. However, how a conventional, by global tender, procurement underwent the chrysalis of a G to G deal is difficult to understand. The buyer and the seller are the same. The specifications and India specific enhancements are laid down by the IAF. Unclear what role the French government plays in such a situation. With India and Dassault having dealt with each other for over forty years, it is not even required as a confirming party. One presumes payments are being made directly to Dassault, not routed through the French Treasury. If the supplier goes bust, unclear if the French Government will reimburse India. Hence their reluctance to furnish a sovereign or bank guarantee, restricting it to a Letter of Comfort. Hopefully, the 36 birds will touch down safely in India, this will not become an issue.